Least Terns

Gallery: AvianPosted June 18, 2010200 views18 comments

D300, 500mm f/4 + 1.7x tc, travel pillow on car window
ISO 250, 1/800 sec at f/8
Photo taken June 17, 2010 shortly after sunrise at Ft. Pickens National Seashore.
The Least Terns are very active at Ft. Pickens now. I've been trying to photograph this activity every morning for the past week. I see active courtship behavior, terns on unhatched eggs, and chicks at a variety of stages of development. The nesting/breeding area is roped off and often there is little choice concerning angle of view, light angle, and BG. With a few exceptions, it is not possible to get very close to the birds and the images I post will be large crops lacking in image quality. But I hope you think they show some interesting behaviors.
In this photo, the right side of the face and chest of the adult bird is lacking in detail compared to the left side which is in shadow. The lack of detail did not occur during post-processing - it is apparent in the imported raw file. This image was cropped to about 20% of full frame.
I like the positions of the two birds and the catch light in the eyes of both birds. Sharpening, exposure and other usual adjustments with LR3 and CS3. I removed with the clone tool a couple of vertical streaks in the BG that were caused by what may have been brush marks on the D300 sensor.
Comments and suggestions most welcome.

Comments

18 comments

Comment posted by Ronnie Gaubert on June 18, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Hi David,
Actually not a bad image for such a huge crop. Not sure the value of such a large crop when it comes down to printing but definetly has value as a web based image. The early light is just perfect. Very good job of processing this image.
Thanks for posting,
Ronnie G.

Registered on November 1, 2003, 810 Posts, 3495 Comments

Comment posted by Nate Chappell on June 18, 2010 at 7:19 PM

This looks great epecially considering the crop size. The little guy is adorable

Registered on February 1, 2006, 1158 Posts, 19528 Comments

Comment posted by David Sparks on June 18, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Ronnie wrote: "Not sure the value of such a large crop when it comes down to printing but definetly has value as a web based image."
I don't do many prints - out of wall space. Curious, however, I printed an 8x10 version of the image. It looks good. With a magnifying glass, I see vertical bands of pixelation in the sky, but not elsewhere. I did noise reduction on the sky and did another 8x10 print. No obvious help. And now that I am sensitized, I can see the vertical bands without the magnifying glass. Nonetheless, the print was much better than I expected.

Registered on May 26, 2007, 290 Posts, 4270 Comments

Comment posted by denise ippolito on June 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM

I like the soft light and the fluffed up pose of the adult. The chick is simply adorable. I might run some NR on the BG. Lovely image-I wish it were mine. Congrats!

Registered on December 17, 2009, 202 Posts, 1529 Comments

Comment posted by SandyRichardsBrown on June 19, 2010 at 2:50 AM

VERY Beautiful image, crop or not.
Very intimate interaction, great colors and fine detail.
To my eye, needs a bit of CW rotation.
Adorable chick and doting parent - a combination hard to beat!
Sandy r

Registered on November 24, 2003, 3937 Posts, 12909 Comments

Comment posted by Ron Bielefeld on June 19, 2010 at 8:23 AM

a great shot of this female and her little one. I really like the comp and the overall color palate. Nice light and good catchlights in both bird's eyes. Looks very nice regardless of the crop. I would be very satisfied with this image is it were mine. Well done.

Registered on December 6, 2008, 360 Posts, 7132 Comments

Comment posted by Nick Saunders on June 19, 2010 at 10:53 AM

Beautiful David. An extremely cute and intimate image.

Registered on February 6, 2008, 321 Posts, 3035 Comments

Comment posted by Michael Twaddell on June 19, 2010 at 11:37 AM

Yep, this is just adorable, whether or not it makes a good print!

Registered on August 16, 2007, 199 Posts, 2132 Comments

Comment posted by Cheryl Molennor on June 19, 2010 at 12:21 PM

Oh sweet sweet sweet. I was out shooting shore chicks this week as well. havn't had time to look at them yet but soon. I love the interaction, the light,detail and the fact that you got 2 catchlights

Registered on June 30, 2009, 300 Posts, 5051 Comments

Comment posted by Monica Siri on June 19, 2010 at 1:29 PM

David,
I like every aspect of this image. You captured a really tender moment so well.

Registered on September 20, 2009, 132 Posts, 3764 Comments

Comment posted by antino cervigni on June 19, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Fantastic image. Regards

Registered on April 17, 2010, 70 Posts, 202 Comments

Comment posted by Gary Gulash on June 19, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I would not have guessed it was such a large crop, looks very good. The sharp beak is a good contrast to the softness of the feathers and the black on the head contrasts well with the white areas, very cool!

Registered on January 28, 2005, 879 Posts, 12098 Comments

Comment posted by Brian Gatlin on June 19, 2010 at 11:08 PM

gorgeous light, and the parent/chick combo is fantastic. this looks really good, especially for the crop.

Registered on March 21, 2009, 202 Posts, 4187 Comments

Comment posted by Satie Sharma on June 20, 2010 at 4:47 AM

Very cute, David. Excellent detail despite the crop. I would love to get an opportunity to shoot these birds.

Registered on November 11, 2003, 189 Posts, 5335 Comments

Comment posted by Gary McGhee on June 20, 2010 at 8:14 AM

This is looks terrific David. Such a cute chick. The early light is wonderful.

Gary.

Registered on April 15, 2010, 142 Posts, 2416 Comments

Comment posted by Steve Balke on June 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM

Beautiful shot, David. I see the decrease in detail you mention on the side of the bird. However, that really is a nit to me. Also, I think it is likely due not to the crop but to exposure. How much to crop is an old topic on this website. Here's how I come to that conclusion for this shot: 20% of your D300's 12.3 MP is 2.5 MP. I don't know your image dimensions but I can try to estimate them: Looking at the dimensions of your large image on the screen it's about 12 inches by 7.75 inches. That translates to 1967 pixels by 1270 pixels for your raw image size (note that 1967 x 1270= 2.5 MP). If you print this using 300 pixels per inch you could make a print 6.6 inches by 4.2 inches (even without "uprezzing" software). On the screen your long dimension is about 12 inches on my monitor, presumably equal to 1200 pixels or 100 pixels per inch on the monitor. An image 1967 by 1270 pixels would be o.k. on my monitor even at 19.67 inches (i.e. 1967/100) by 12.7 inches (1270/100). The reason I mention all this is that I think it is worthwhile to try to figure out if crop size is the problem. If we blame crop size and the answer is really our exposure settings then we try to solve the wrong problem. Also, if we overestimate the effect of crop size then we can too quickly discard good images (or not even capture them) because of the needed crop. This is my try at figuring it out. I'm certainly no expert but this crop question sure bothers me sometimes too. In your case I'd like to see more of these images despite the large crops!

Registered on June 18, 2009, 229 Posts, 2915 Comments

Comment posted by Ken Archer on June 20, 2010 at 8:09 PM

Looks pretty awesome to me too!!!

Ken Archer

Registered on October 28, 2004, 222 Posts, 6683 Comments

Comment posted by Jim Hackley on June 21, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Well done for a 20% of full frame, the detail is still there where it counts, way to go.

Registered on September 17, 2009, 302 Posts, 5535 Comments